CVE-2025-69985
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedFUXA 1.2.8 and prior contains an Authentication Bypass vulnerability leading to Remote Code Execution (RCE). The vulnerability exists in the server/api/jwt-helper.js middleware, which improperly trusts the HTTP "Referer" header to validate internal requests. A remote unauthenticated attacker can bypass JWT authentication by spoofing the Referer header to match the server's host. Successful exploitation allows the attacker to access the protected /api/runscript endpoint and execute arbitrary Node.js code on the server.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · high confidenceThe FUXA jwt-helper.js middleware incorrectly trusts the HTTP Referer header to determine if requests are internal, allowing attackers to spoof this header to match the server's hostname and bypass JWT authentication entirely. This grants unauthenticated access to the /api/runscript endpoint, enabling arbitrary Node.js code execution on the server.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data<= 1.2.8CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Network
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- High
- Integrity
- High
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify FUXA versionLocate the FUXA installation and check the version number (typically visible in the application UI, package.json, or server startup logs). Compare your version against the affected range: <= 1.2.8Affected if The installed FUXA version is 1.2.8 or lower
-
Locate jwt-helper.js middlewareSearch the FUXA server installation for the file jwt-helper.js (typically found in the server source code directory). Inspect the file contents for logic that reads the HTTP Referer headerAffected if The jwt-helper.js file exists and contains code that uses the Referer header to determine if requests are internal or to bypass authentication checks
-
Check Referer-based authentication bypassWithin jwt-helper.js, identify if authentication is skipped based solely on the Referer header matching the server hostname. Look for conditional logic that trusts Referer without JWT validationAffected if Authentication logic conditionally trusts the Referer header without requiring valid JWT credentials
-
Verify /api/runscript endpoint exposureCheck if the /api/runscript endpoint exists in the FUXA API routes and is accessible. This endpoint allows arbitrary Node.js code execution when authentication is bypassedAffected if The /api/runscript endpoint is exposed and accessible without valid JWT authentication when Referer header is spoofed
You are affected if FUXA version is 1.2.8 or lower AND the jwt-helper.js middleware contains logic that trusts the HTTP Referer header to bypass JWT authentication, allowing unauthenticated access to the /api/runscript endpoint.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scopedUpgrade to FUXA version 1.2.9 or later which implements proper JWT validation without relying on the Referer header; alternatively, add server-side validation that rejects requests with spoofed Referer headers and enforce stricter authentication on the runscript endpoint.
Fuxa 1.2.9 or later
- 1. Identify the current Fuxa version by checking package.json or the running application
- 2. Back up the entire Fuxa installation directory and database before upgrading
- 3. Upgrade Fuxa to version 1.2.9 or later by running: npm install fuxa@latest or npm install [email protected]
- 4. Verify the upgrade completed successfully by checking the new version number
- 5. Restart the Fuxa service to apply changes
- 6. Test that authentication is properly enforced by attempting requests without valid JWT and without spoofed Referer header
- 7. Confirm the /api/runscript endpoint now requires valid authentication and cannot be accessed via Referer header spoofing
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing8.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,656.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2025-69985 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2025-69985 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data